LINK ONLY TO MICHIGAN LIVE
Thursday, December 31, 2009
There is nothing benign about American Leftism, and that it is even more dangerous than the nanny state some people seem willing to accept as the price of living in the modern world. Because American leftists are as committed to elevating the rights of the criminals, the crazies and the perverts as they are to taxing, quashing and directing the middle and working classes, we can anticipate the worst of all possible worlds: an America in which ordinary people live under totalitarian control and socialist taxation, while the worst elements in every society are allowed to run rampant.
In the past 48 hours, the blogosphere has awakened to the cause of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. There hasn't been any recent public polling, but my sense is that a poll of likely voters would show Scott Brown within single digits of Martha Coakley, with those most likely to vote opting strongly for Brown. Perhaps the lack of polling betrays the conventional wisdom that Coakley would win in a rout, but maybe one of the more forward-looking public pollsters like Rasmussen or PPP will prove me wrong and poll this thing.
The case for a Brown upset can be summed up as follows: A January 19th special election would likely skew the turnout universe more Republican than it ever would be in the Bay State. The race has received comparably little attention, so turnout is likely to be low, and a minor surge in Republican turnout could go a long way.
Lest Democrats try to console themselves with the thought that perhaps Rasmussen has got it wrong, CNN's latest poll, from just a few days before the Christmas Eve vote, showed Americans opposing Obamacare by a similar tally: 56 percent to 42 percent.
In light of these numbers -- and in light of the extreme difficulty that the Democrats had in squeezing a bill tailor-made for the House through the House, and one tailor-made for the Senate through the Senate -- anyone who thinks that either the passage or the subsequent implementation of Obamacare is anything remotely resembling inevitable, is forgetting that Tocqueville's book wasn't called Monarchy in America.
To begin, Obama is the first president to give an international law enforcement organization like Interpol free rein within the territorial confines of this nation, presumably not excluding the arrest and exportation of Americans to be charged with crimes under international law.
Put simply, this means the Constitution is no longer the supreme law of the land in America. Thanks to Executive Order 12425 , which Obama signed Dec. 16 without explaining why, the supreme law of the land is now arguably whatever Interpol says it is, most likely as directed by the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, in conjunction with the United Nations.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
"Conservatives can't have it both ways," the official says. "You can't be complaining about the hypothetical abdication of US jurisdiction at the same time you're complaining the Obama administration is not being tough enough on national security."
Obama administration officials say this new executive order doesn't allow INTERPOL to do any more than they were allowed to do once Reagan recognized them as a public international organization. Though clearly the Executive Order does prohibit US law enforcement from searching and seizing INTERPOL records, officials say, those provisions can be waived by the president if need be.
Noted at The Corner:
To see the danger we face because of Obama’s return to a law-enforcement approach to terrorist interrogation, read today’s front-page story in the Washington Post.
At the very end of the article, the Post notes:
Abdulmutallab remains in a Detroit area prison and, after initial debriefings by the FBI, has restricted his cooperation since securing a defense attorney, according to federal officials. Authorities are holding out hopethat he will change his mind and cooperate with the probe, the officials said. (Emphasis added)
Writes Marc Thiessen: Holding out hope? Change his mind? Are they kidding? A terrorist like Abdulmutallab is not a common criminal who should be told he has the “right to remain silent.” He is an enemy combatant, who tried to commit an act of war against the United States of America. He possesses vital intelligence about the terrorist network that deployed him to attack America, and may be planning still more attacks. The Obama administration has a responsibility to make him give up that information. Treating him like a criminal is an abdication of that responsibility, and puts our nation at risk.
There is a later note:
Several readers have pointed out that the Post has mysteriously dropped this line, which appears in the print edition, from the online version:
Authorities are holding out hope that he will change his mind and cooperate with the probe, the officials said.
I guess they have given up hope?
No presidential statement or White House press briefing was held on it. In fact, all that can be found about it on the official White House Web site is the Dec. 17 announcement and one-paragraph text of President Obama's Executive Order 12425, with this innocuous headline: "Amending Executive Order 12425 Designating Interpol as a public international organization entitled to enjoy certain privileges, exemptions, and immunities."In fact, this new directive from Obama may be the most destructive blow ever struck against American constitutional civil liberties. No wonder the White House said as little as possible about it.
Don't mind us, just trying to connect some dots.At least one leader of al-Qa'ida's branch in Yemen, where the failed bomber of a US-bound Christmas flight was allegedly trained, was freed from the US prison in Guantanamo, Cuba, a Pentagon list reveals.Hmm. That name seems familiar.
The list, released in May, names 27 former prisoners who resumed terrorist activities after being released from Guantanamo, including Said Ali al-Shihri, who was transferred to Saudi Arabia in 2007 and later implicated in the bombing of the US embassy in Yemen's capital, Sanaa, last year.
ABC television named Muhammad Attik al-Harbi, a former al-Qa'ida leader in Yemen, as another unrepentant former Guantanamo prisoner.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Despite all the compromises, it has finally been possible to ensure something so fundamental, as the right of every American not to be financially shipwrecked when their health fails them. Add to that the biggest ever financial support package in America’s history, a major disarmament agreement and the quickest-ever re-establishment of American reputation.
This is, truly, the most difficult essay we’ve ever had to write, but after an agonizing internal debate, we need to ask everyone who reads this to support Republican Scott Brown for US Senate in Massachusetts.
In any other year, in any other election, we’d work our hearts out for Martha Coakley. We like Martha Coakley. We’d love to see her be a United States Senator. But, this Massachusetts special election to fill the seat of deceased murderer and disgraced drunk Ted Kennedy is a chance to knock the Democrats down to 59 seats in the Senate, meaning the unconstitutional train wreck they’ve put this country on with Healthcare Rationing will come to a screaching halt the moment Scott Brown is elected.
But in the final pre-count estimate just released by the Census Bureau, we already have a broad idea of where the results are headed and what they will mean politically.
Of the states gaining House seats -- Texas (three) and Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington -- only Washington is reliably Democratic, having last voted for a Republican presidential candidate in 1984.
They disagree strongly with the American Medical Association and its president, Cecil Wilson. With only 20 percent of physicians as members, the group has come out in support of the Senate health-reform bill, and it is focused on issues (blocking the cosmetic-surgery tax and the 5 percent tax for high Medicare users, for example) that most practicing physicians aren't really concerned about.
Monday, December 28, 2009
If the president of the United States has an aboveboard reason for making a foreign law enforcement agency exempt from American laws on American soil, it wasn’t shared by the White House.
Andy McCarthy, former assistant United States attorney for the Southern District of New York and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, notes at National Review that the limitations that Obama removed are “what prevents law-enforcement and its controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical.”
A paragraph later, McCarthy describes Obama’s actions in the starkest of terms:
This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
Some bloggers covering this story are noting that the law enforcement agency to which Obama has extended such extraordinary powers to has had a dismal past.
INTERPOL’s senior leadership was flush with Nazis from the late 1930s all the way into the 1970s. That fact allowed, going Godwin isn’t necessarily relevant to today’s organization. Khoo Boon Hui of Singapore is the current president of the organization, and the current secretary general is American Ronald Noble. Noble is perhaps best known in America for overseeing the Treasury Department’s review of the disastrous 1993 raid and siege of a Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, that left nearly 80 people dead. Noble had cautioned against the initial raid plan as being too dangerous, but the lack of any significant ramifications for federal officials that approved of the raid and allegations of a cover-up have inspired conspiracy theorists to derisively dub Noble “the Enforcer.”But INTERPOL’s past isn’t what concerns us at this moment. Its current actions and the actions of our president are those that we question.
And guess who hasn't spoken out yet in support of the freedom fighters? In fact, Dear Leader has supported the current Iranian regime in their attempts to beat the freedom fighters into submission and sometimes death. Angela Merkel spoke out in support today. Where's Obama? At the beach. But don't worry it's part of a greater "strategy."
2) For the last eight years, many have patiently tried to suggest that the answer to "Why do they hate us?" does not entail poverty, Western imperialism or colonialism, support for Israel, past provocations, etc. Rather, radical Islam encourages in an Hasan or Mutallab age-old passions like pride, envy, and a sense of inferiority — all accelerated by instantaneous communications and abetted by continual Western apologetics that on a global level blame Westerners for self-induced misery in many Islamic countries. "They did it" is far easier than looking inward to address tribalism, gender apartheid, statism, autocracy, religious intolerance, and fundamentalism, which in perfect-storm fashion ensure an impoverished — and resentful and angry — radical Islamic community while the rest of the world moves merrily on.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
"On the one hand, it seems he's been on the terror watch list but not on the no-fly list," he said. "That doesn't square because the American Department for Homeland Security has pretty stringent data-mining capability. I don't understand how he had a valid visa if he was known on the terror watch list.
"Why didn't he go to the toilets to detonate the bomb? Why would he try to set it off 20 minutes before he's going to land? It could probably have been successful had the person not been amateurish. I think this is a sign that it's much more difficult now for al-Qa'ida to pull off something serious."
Chaim Koppel, a security consultant, added: "I think the explosive was supposed to go bang rather than just start a fire. The terrorists probably didn't mix it well enough. Maybe they didn't do enough practice runs, but the more the guy is trained, the more exposed he is to MI5, MI6, the FBI and other security agencies, so he probably didn't receive enough training."
Saturday, December 26, 2009
At one point during the ordeal, passengers were told that the man who helped subdue the alleged attacker was exiting the plane. A female passenger who was seated 13 rows behind the suspect recalled the scene clearly. The woman, a nurse named Michelle from Dayton, Ohio, who did not want her last name published, described a blonde man with his fingers individually bandaged, and another bandage around his palm. A few people, she said, began to clap as he walked by.
Reflecting the new, more proactive security role that has emerged for passengers in the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attacks in the U.S., Rep. Peter King (R., N.Y.) told Fox News, "they were the first responders in this attack; they got the job done."
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said Tim Groseclose, a UCLA political scientist and the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."
"Overall, the major media outlets are quite moderate compared to members of Congress, but even so, there is a quantifiable and significant bias in that nearly all of them lean to the left," said co‑author Jeffrey Milyo,
economist and public policy scholar. Universityof Missouri
Friday, December 25, 2009
In light of what we know and can observe, it is our logical conclusion that President Obama's Executive Order amending President Ronald Reagans' 1983 EO 12425 and placing INTERPOL above the United States Constitution and beyond the legal reach of our own top law enforcement is a precursor to more damaging moves.
The pre-requisite conditions regarding the Iraq withdrawal and the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility closure will continue their course. meanwhile, the next move from President Obama is likely an attempt to dissolve the agreements made between President Bush and other states preventing them from turning over American military forces to the ICC (via INTERPOL) for war crimes or any other prosecutions.
When the paths on the road map converge - Iraq withdrawal, Guantánamo closure, perceived American image improved internationally, and an empowered INTERPOL in the United States - it is probable that President Barack Obama will once again make America a signatory to the International Criminal Court. It will be a move that surrenders American sovereignty to an international body who's INTERPOL enforcement arm has already been elevated above the Constitution and American domestic law enforcement.
For an added and disturbing wrinkle, INTERPOL's central operations office in the United States is within our own Justice Department offices. They are American law enforcement officers working under the aegis of INTERPOL within our own Justice Department. That they now operate with full diplomatic immunity and with "inviolable archives" from within our own buildings should send red flags soaring into the clouds.
Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law? [Andy McCarthy]
You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an international police force immune from the restraints of American law[SNIP}
On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
Christmas is the beginning of a new cycle of teaching them, isn’t it? We show them the baby in a cave, and tell them to watch him just as the shepherds watched the miraculous star, and over the months to come we tell them what he did as a man, and we lead them to the tree which he climbed to die, and we fix their eyes there, telling them: watch, watch, see what has happened. Then we take them to his second cave, to the rolled-aside stone and the weeping women, and tell them to fix their eyes on his shoulders walking away, to hear him calling for them to follow, and we pray that this is the voice they remember as we grow feeble, not our own voices even, but the voice of the one they must follow if they are to have the gift we desperately want for them but cannot ourselves give.